PDA

View Full Version : Should animals have rights?




libertybrewcity
05-31-2010, 02:00 AM
New farm building code worries pork producers

Manitoba hog producers say farm building code changes being pushed by animal rights groups could put the industry out of business.

The code could include requirements for sprinkler systems, firewalls and alarms in new and renovated barns housing animals.

The activist group Canadians for the Ethical Treatment of Food Animals supports stricter industry-wide building codes, saying thousands of animals have died over the years in hog barn fires.

But while the animal rights group says contemplated changes to the code don't go far enough — Manitoba's hog producers say while they're to make changes, they also have to keep an eye on costs.

"If we put the cost too high then you're going to put the producers out of business," said Manitoba Pork Council chairman Karl Kynoch.

Activists say thousands of hogs and other animals are at risk under existing building standards. Current building codes fail to take into account the fact that many farms have evolved from small-family owned businesses to larger industrial-type operations, they argue.



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2010/05/24/manitoba-hog-barn-building-code.html#ixzz0pUZ0slEi

slothman
05-31-2010, 07:50 PM
Either you are a sapient being, i.e. human, or property.
When you can prove animals are like humans in that regard then they get rights.
And the ability to own property, vote, go to jail, etc.
I doubt PETA wants to give dogs social security money.

Warrior_of_Freedom
05-31-2010, 07:58 PM
PETA hates humans.

CasualApathy
05-31-2010, 07:58 PM
I don't buy it when people say that a dog for example is just acting on instinct and is not self aware at all. I think all higher forms of life should be protected, which means basically all mammals. I don't see why we can't wait to eat a cow after it has died of natural causes after a full and happy life.

It would make the production far less effective of course.

Of course we have taken a giant leap compared to the rest of nature, but we are still governed by instincts and basic emotions to a large extent too. We are not that different in that regard.

And yea, PETA are extrimists.

Vessol
05-31-2010, 08:00 PM
I don't buy it when people say that a dog for example is just acting on instinct and is not self aware at all. I think all higher forms of life should be protected, which means basically all mammals. I don't see why we can't wait to eat a cow after it has died of natural causes after a full and happy life.

It would make the production far less effective of course.

The would be some nasty ass steaks.

Warrior_of_Freedom
05-31-2010, 08:01 PM
The would be some nasty ass steaks.

We will just have to build a machine that turns happiness into food.

Travlyr
05-31-2010, 08:02 PM
Animals would have a hard time hiring lawyers to defend those rights.

CasualApathy
05-31-2010, 08:04 PM
Nasty steaks or not, take a look at this and see if you don't loose your appetite:

Earthlings (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6361872964130308142#)

Icymudpuppy
05-31-2010, 08:06 PM
I don't buy it when people say that a dog for example is just acting on instinct and is not self aware at all. I think all higher forms of life should be protected, which means basically all mammals. I don't see why we can't wait to eat a cow after it has died of natural causes after a full and happy life.

It would make the production far less effective of course.

So, you would prefer to be a scavenger rather than a predator. I've noticed that Lions, Cheetahs, Wolves, etc don't wait for their prey to die of natural causes. We haven't evolved a sufficient immune system to be carrion eaters. We haven't evolved a sufficient digestive system to be herbivores unless you want to be copraphagic (eat your own shit to digest it a second time) like rabbits and beavers. That leaves us with fresh kill meat, and ripe fruit for things our bodies are capable of digesting properly. Kind of a limited diet.

You should take a class on comparitive physiology, and wildlife nutrition to really get a good grasp on these concepts. Cornell has an excellent program.

Old Ducker
05-31-2010, 08:08 PM
As regards the OP question, I think it was Ayn Rand who answered it with, "Sure, as soon as they demand them."

I do believe humans have a moral responsibility to treat animals humanely, especially pets or in general animal husbandry.

CasualApathy
05-31-2010, 08:10 PM
So, you would prefer to be a scavenger rather than a predator. I've noticed that Lions, Cheetahs, Wolves, etc don't wait for their prey to die of natural causes. We haven't evolved a sufficient immune system to be carrion eaters. We haven't evolved a sufficient digestive system to be herbivores unless you want to be copraphagic (eat your own shit to digest it a second time) like rabbits and beavers. That leaves us with fresh kill meat, and ripe fruit for things our bodies are capable of digesting properly. Kind of a limited diet.

You should take a class on comparitive physiology, and wildlife nutrition to really get a good grasp on these concepts. Cornell has an excellent program.

Well, that is a good point, I hadn't thought of that.

I guess we can not escape our predator nature, but the least we could do if give the animals a good and natural life and kill it humanely, perhaps through gradual oxigen depravation as has been tried and tested in several countries. The animals fall asleep and die feeling nothing.

freedoms-light
05-31-2010, 08:12 PM
My cat has rights as I grant them to her as long as she remains on my property.
Anyone messes with her while she is under my protection may have a problem.
If she strays, she may just have to draw on one of her "8 lives" (I think she used one already).
I have obtained permission for her to enter neighbors yards, but otherwise when there, she's on her own.
Mice, rabbits, birds and squirrels do not have rights while on my property unless granted by my cat.

AmericaFyeah92
05-31-2010, 08:13 PM
I think people forget that we, humans, are just another species. A predatory species at that.

Do wolves worry about the "rights" of deer? Does an ant colony worry about how its impacting the environment when they build their little kingdoms out of surrounding foliage? Would you tell a bald eagle to have more respect for the salmon population?

ALL organisms survive at the expense of other organisms

CasualApathy
05-31-2010, 08:19 PM
I think people forget that we, humans, are just another species. A predatory species at that.

Do wolves worry about the "rights" of deer? Does an ant colony worry about how its impacting the environment when they build their little kingdoms out of surrounding foliage? Would you tell a bald eagle to have more respect for the salmon population?

ALL organisms survive at the expense of other organisms

That is one way of looking at it, but most people would object to the notion that we are just another animal. We ARE "just" another animal, but we are also unique in the sense that we have reached a point in our evolution where we can rise above our own nature to a certain degree, and because of that we have a choice in how we go about treating other animals. Unless we are in a survival situation, there is no need to inflict suffering on our pray, and it's not like it is a lot of effort to go about it in the right way.

Does it matter? Well, it does to me at least. Though strictly speaking you are correct that there is no need to worry about it.

Icymudpuppy
05-31-2010, 08:23 PM
Well, that is a good point, I hadn't thought of that.

I guess we can not escape our predator nature, but the least we could do if give the animals a good and natural life and kill it humanely, perhaps through gradual oxigen depravation as has been tried and tested in several countries. The animals fall asleep and die feeling nothing.

Slow oxygen deprivation requires containment within a gas chamber which is a stressful act of itself. As a professional hunter and trapper who has used many methods of Euthanasia, including oxygen deprivation and lethal injection, the most humane way is the one in which the animal doesn't even know anything unusual is happening at all. Thus, a bullet to the brain with the prey completely unaware of the shooter is the most humane way of killing an animal. Quick, painless, stress free.

ChaosControl
05-31-2010, 08:26 PM
Animals at the very least should be protected from being abused or neglected.

Take the whole idea of not harming others and I think that should be extended to not harm animals or the environment.

As for "rights", well I wouldn't say they have the same rights as people, but they should have the right to live free from abuse. I think anyone who abuses or neglects animals should be punished far more heavily than they currently are.

ChaosControl
05-31-2010, 08:28 PM
So, you would prefer to be a scavenger rather than a predator. I've noticed that Lions, Cheetahs, Wolves, etc don't wait for their prey to die of natural causes. We haven't evolved a sufficient immune system to be carrion eaters. We haven't evolved a sufficient digestive system to be herbivores unless you want to be copraphagic (eat your own shit to digest it a second time) like rabbits and beavers. That leaves us with fresh kill meat, and ripe fruit for things our bodies are capable of digesting properly. Kind of a limited diet.

You should take a class on comparitive physiology, and wildlife nutrition to really get a good grasp on these concepts. Cornell has an excellent program.

Um, what are you talking about. Of course we can be herbivores.

low preference guy
05-31-2010, 08:28 PM
Animals at the very least should be protected from being abused or neglected.

Take the whole idea of not harming others and I think that should be extended to not harm animals or the environment.

As for "rights", well I wouldn't say they have the same rights as people, but they should have the right to live free from abuse. I think anyone who abuses or neglects animals should be punished far more heavily than they currently are.

so everyone should be a vegetarian?

catdd
05-31-2010, 08:33 PM
My cat has rights as I grant them to her as long as she remains on my property.
Anyone messes with her while she is under my protection may have a problem.
If she strays, she may just have to draw on one of her "8 lives" (I think she used one already).
I have obtained permission for her to enter neighbors yards, but otherwise when there, she's on her own.
Mice, rabbits, birds and squirrels do not have rights while on my property unless granted by my cat.

Enjoyed that.

ChaosControl
05-31-2010, 08:39 PM
so everyone should be a vegetarian?

That would be my ideal, but I do realize that most people are not willing to go that route and I cannot force it on them. But I do think we need laws against animal abuse and neglect and that penalties for such need to be more severe than they presently are.

low preference guy
05-31-2010, 08:41 PM
That would be my ideal, but I do realize that most people are not willing to go that route and I cannot force it on them. But I do think we need laws against animal abuse and neglect and that penalties for such need to be more severe than they presently are.

is neglecting care of an animal worse than killing them and eating them? if you have laws against neglect, it follows that you should have laws against killing them. having laws against neglect but not against killing them is ridiculous.

Icymudpuppy
05-31-2010, 08:41 PM
Um, what are you talking about. Of course we can be herbivores.

Sure, if you want to live your life with a permanent protein deficiency, you can. Thats fine for most activities except strenous physical activity which requires substancial protein to repair and grow muscle tissue, and pregnant and nursing women who are growing new muscles in their offspring.

Of course, with modern pharmaceutical technology, I suppose you could take pills to supplement your protein needs, but do you really think formula is as good as breast milk from a properly dieted mother?

There is a reason that most vegans are skinny, pale, weak, and several I know are barren. They are protein deficient.

Yes, you can get some protein from beans and nuts, but you need to be copraphagic to get the full benefit of it. So, before you flush, consider getting out your spoon.

Otherwise, do your body a favor and at least eat eggs, or swallow cum to get the protein your body needs. Unless of course all you do is sit and watch TV all day, in which case the only muscle that needs repair will be your heart.

ChaosControl
05-31-2010, 08:49 PM
is neglecting care of an animal worse than killing them and eating them? if you have laws against neglect, it follows that you should have laws against killing them. having laws against neglect but not against killing them is ridiculous.

Neglect is a form of abuse.
Like not feeding the animal and making it starve.

You can kill an animal in a relatively humane way. Such that it feels no pain and doesn't suffer.

ChaosControl
05-31-2010, 08:56 PM
Sure, if you want to live your life with a permanent protein deficiency, you can. Thats fine for most activities except strenous physical activity which requires substancial protein to repair and grow muscle tissue, and pregnant and nursing women who are growing new muscles in their offspring.

Of course, with modern pharmaceutical technology, I suppose you could take pills to supplement your protein needs, but do you really think formula is as good as breast milk from a properly dieted mother?

There is a reason that most vegans are skinny, pale, weak, and several I know are barren. They are protein deficient.

Yes, you can get some protein from beans and nuts, but you need to be copraphagic to get the full benefit of it. So, before you flush, consider getting out your spoon.

Otherwise, do your body a favor and at least eat eggs, or swallow cum to get the protein your body needs. Unless of course all you do is sit and watch TV all day, in which case the only muscle that needs repair will be your heart.

It is true many vegans lack knowledge regarding nutrition, however you can get all the protein you need easily from a vegan diet. Fact is most people eat too much protein. Just as they eat too many carbohydrates and too many fats...

And the only vitamin that you cannot normally otherwise get is B12, which you can easily get from either a multi-vitamin mix or some kind of fortified food. As it is just the vitamin, you're still sticking to a vegan diet. However the amount you need is relatively small and you could get it naturally if you're willing to grow your own food and not wash them, since it is a bacteria. But since most people are probably not willing to do that, they'll have to go with the multi-vitamins.

had looked into some things like nutritional yeast that I had thought was a natural source of B12 but apparently that was just a fortified too, it seems the unwashed food is the only natural source of it. After all, thats really how you ultimately get it no matter what anyway. You eat something that either ate those unwashed foods or something that came from something that did. It is the source.

low preference guy
05-31-2010, 08:59 PM
Neglect is a form of abuse.
Like not feeding the animal and making it starve.

You can kill an animal in a relatively humane way. Such that it feels no pain and doesn't suffer.

But killing them without suffering in some cases costs more money. That would increase the price of some food items, and make it harder for poor people to buy them.

Is it OK that a greater number of poor people starve if that is going to ensure that animals are killed in a nicer way?

Vessol
05-31-2010, 09:00 PM
If people want to have a vegan or vegetarian diet, that's their right and I support them. I personally don't eat much meat, much preferring grains, lentils, fruits and vegies. However I do enjoy the meat I do eat, it balances my diet how I choose.

ChaosControl
05-31-2010, 09:13 PM
But killing them without suffering in some cases costs more money. That would increase the price of some food items, and make it harder for poor people to buy them.

Is it OK that a greater number of poor people starve if that is going to ensure that animals are killed in a nicer way?

No one is going to starve because of this. If the price of meat increases, they can always consume less of it and consume more vegetables instead.

low preference guy
05-31-2010, 09:17 PM
No one is going to starve because of this. If the price of meat increases, they can always consume less of it and consume more vegetables instead.

What if they don't eat vegetables? I don't eat salads because I really dislike them.

I find it scary that you prefer humans to consume less food at the price of killing an animal in a nicer way, and note that's an animal that would be killed anyway. I find your position a direct attack on my life just like Barack Obama's universal health care plan. You're truly scary.

AmericaFyeah92
05-31-2010, 09:17 PM
We don't owe animals anything. And I say that as a dog-lover.

But we are not angels sent from heaven to watch over them and worry about what's in their best interests, at the expense of ours. We are animals, not guardians, and like all other animals species we should only pursue lifestyles/policies that help our own kind.

Kludge
05-31-2010, 09:38 PM
I love the way the question is asked: SHOULD animals have rights.....

Should humans have rights?


I used to think rights existed based on "common sense" - then I thought about it and decided rights don't exist, which was part of nihilism - but now I think the word itself is misdirecting responsibility.

The trouble is that we determine what justice ought to be by asking "What would GOVERNMENT ideally do?" instead of "What would I ideally do?" - This is the problem I have with government justice as a whole. Sure - I think everyone should be nice, but would I kidnap and detain someone who wasn't nice? No - and certainly not for something like torturing a dog -- now, I or another bystander might beat the shit out of the fellow until we feel satisfied, but I don't see what good it'd be to hold a bunch of people in my cellar I have to feed and clothe and other bullshit. So what should the punishment be for animal abuse? I don't know - I'd think only family & friends should be the ones determining punishment since they'll better-understand the person.

But following that logic will probably bring you to the realization that society works best with people you know well and respect - a selective society instead of the massive non-discriminating United States which Americans seem to be proud of for being relatively non-discriminatory in who they let immigrate (well.... less certain nationalities at certain times).

It drives me to mania that soldiers don't know the people they're killing, nor executioners.

RedStripe
05-31-2010, 09:41 PM
Either you are a sapient being, i.e. human, or property.
When you can prove animals are like humans in that regard then they get rights.
And the ability to own property, vote, go to jail, etc.
I doubt PETA wants to give dogs social security money.

1. Are you pro-life? If so, LOL

2. Do the extremely mentally impaired deserve any heightened standard of treatment beyond that of a rock?

3. Is there anything wrong with intentionally torturing, say, a dog or chimp? If so, why?

RedStripe
05-31-2010, 09:45 PM
So, you would prefer to be a scavenger rather than a predator. I've noticed that Lions, Cheetahs, Wolves, etc don't wait for their prey to die of natural causes. We haven't evolved a sufficient immune system to be carrion eaters. We haven't evolved a sufficient digestive system to be herbivores unless you want to be copraphagic (eat your own shit to digest it a second time) like rabbits and beavers. That leaves us with fresh kill meat, and ripe fruit for things our bodies are capable of digesting properly. Kind of a limited diet.

You should take a class on comparitive physiology, and wildlife nutrition to really get a good grasp on these concepts. Cornell has an excellent program.

Millions of vegetarians would disagree. We probably have the most diverse and adaptive diet of the entire animal kingdom and our most important organ is the brain which we can use to essentially modify our diet at will through creative ways. In fact, what could be more human than changing our behaviors over time to adapt to new cultural and environmental circumstances, such as eating less meat or obtaining it through more ethical and humane means?

AmericaFyeah92
05-31-2010, 09:46 PM
1. Are you pro-life? If so, LOL

2. Do the extremely mentally impaired deserve any heightened standard of treatment beyond that of a rock?

3. Is there anything wrong with intentionally torturing, say, a dog or chimp? If so, why?

To #3: Doing so would be sick and depraved, but if the person is the legitemate owner of the animal, no legal action would be justified. Would you legally punish someone for torturing an ant or pouring salt on a slug?

RedStripe
05-31-2010, 09:48 PM
I think people forget that we, humans, are just another species. A predatory species at that.

Do wolves worry about the "rights" of deer? Does an ant colony worry about how its impacting the environment when they build their little kingdoms out of surrounding foliage? Would you tell a bald eagle to have more respect for the salmon population?

ALL organisms survive at the expense of other organisms

Right and wolves don't care about the rights of other wolves, animals of the same species kill each other all the time, many animals will kill humans without a second thought. That's no argument for behaving in the same way.

RedStripe
05-31-2010, 09:51 PM
To #3: Doing so would be sick and depraved, but if the person is the legitemate owner of the animal, no legal action would be justified.

Why not?



Would you legally punish someone for torturing an ant or pouring salt on a slug?

When I'm the philosopher king? No.

RedStripe
05-31-2010, 10:00 PM
We don't owe animals anything.

We don't owe each other anything either.



But we are not angels sent from heaven to watch over them and worry about what's in their best interests, at the expense of ours. We are animals, not guardians, and like all other animals species we should only pursue lifestyles/policies that help our own kind.

Your argument is essentially the same as an argument arguing that we have no responsibility to watch out for each other, worry about what is in our fellow man's interest (at the expense of ours, personally, or as a tribe, nation, race, etc), and that we should just pursue lifestyles that help ourselves.

The reason I disagree with that argument, and yours, is because I believe we can choose to take on that responsibility if we wish because we have evolved the cranial and cultural capacity to do so. The only thing stopping us is a debate over what we want to do (and it's not stopping all of us), and the various interests which motivate those actions.

libertybrewcity
05-31-2010, 10:25 PM
so for example, chickens that are put in 2 by 2 foot cages for the rest of their lives, do you think they should be treated with more respect as god's creatures and maybe be allowed to roam on a plot of land instead of a cage?

0zzy
05-31-2010, 10:30 PM
I don't believe in the torture of animals. They should be treated as good as you can treat them, before you slit their throat and eat their ribs.

Warrior_of_Freedom
05-31-2010, 10:34 PM
so for example, chickens that are put in 2 by 2 foot cages for the rest of their lives, do you think they should be treated with more respect as god's creatures and maybe be allowed to roam on a plot of land instead of a cage?

I agree with this. Happier animals are healthier, and they taste better.

AmericaFyeah92
05-31-2010, 10:38 PM
Why not? .

Because if you charge them with "animal cruelty," or "animal abuse," you open up certain floodgates (my salt on a slug example)

AmericaFyeah92
05-31-2010, 10:39 PM
Why not? .

Because if you charge them with "animal cruelty," or "animal abuse," you open up certain floodgates (my salt on a slug example)


Also, they are not practicing any agression upon another human being.

AmericaFyeah92
05-31-2010, 10:41 PM
We don't owe each other anything either.



Your argument is essentially the same as an argument arguing that we have no responsibility to watch out for each other, worry about what is in our fellow man's interest (at the expense of ours, personally, or as a tribe, nation, race, etc), and that we should just pursue lifestyles that help ourselves.

The reason I disagree with that argument, and yours, is because I believe we can choose to take on that responsibility if we wish because we have evolved the cranial and cultural capacity to do so. The only thing stopping us is a debate over what we want to do (and it's not stopping all of us), and the various interests which motivate those actions.

No, the argument isn't the same. It is in the inherent interests of humanity as a species and as individuals that we recognize EACHOTHER'S rights. That creates a better world for us HUMANS.

libertythor
05-31-2010, 11:09 PM
Ethically animals should not be mistreated, and their death should be as painless as practically possible, but other than that they are generally the property of the individual.

Here is a similar topic involving animal welfare:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=247255

For those who think that eating meat should be banned, would humans have the right to consensual relations with the animals? Would it be legal to have animals as property or pets? How do you determine the legal consent of an animal to being under your custodianship?

slothman
06-01-2010, 12:13 AM
1. Are you pro-life? If so, LOL

2. Do the extremely mentally impaired deserve any
heightened standard of treatment beyond that of a rock?

3. Is there anything wrong with intentionally
torturing, say, a dog or chimp? If so, why?

1. How is being pro-life LOL? :shrugs:
2. Extremely mentally impaired people are still sapient, AFAIK.
3. There should not be anything wrong with it legally.
Morally, I don't like torturing an ant or even a flower.
Of course I eat wheat.
You take it alive and grind it up.
Except for lack of neurons that can't feel good.

If cruelty to dogs is bad then what about all mammals?
Birds? Reptiles? Spiders? Worms?
Sponges, they are in the animal phylum porifera?
Plants? Mushrooms? Bacteria?
Where does the cruelty boundry end?

P.S. what is the smiley code for 'shrugs'?

Nate-ForLiberty
06-01-2010, 12:15 AM
http://www.netflix.com/WiMovie/30_Days_Season_3/70104296?strackid=6676680efb04d617_1_srl&strkid=347411637_1_0&trkid=438381

episode 3: "Animal Rights"

libertythor
06-01-2010, 01:59 AM
or swallow cum to get the protein your body needs. Unless of course all you do is sit and watch TV all day, in which case the only muscle that needs repair will be your heart.

How much cum would one have to swallow to get the required amount of protein?

idiom
06-01-2010, 02:30 AM
Animals would have a hard time hiring lawyers to defend those rights.

There are a lot of humans who would have a hard time hiring lawyers or petitioning for their rights.

idiom
06-01-2010, 02:35 AM
Either you are a sapient being, i.e. human, or property.
When you can prove animals are like humans in that regard then they get rights.


Sapient means being able to make judgments, which tonnes of animals and even a few machines can.

However you defined sapient being as human. So your sentence is:

Either you are a human, or property. When you can prove animals are [human] like humans in that regard then they get right.

Are you looking for defence of territory? Tool Use? Farming other animals? Agriculture? Hunting each other for sport? Animals do all of those.

When you can prove your definitions are not totally arbitrary then animals won't have rights.

fj45lvr
06-01-2010, 02:45 AM
the right to be fed and not abused

until the owner is hungry enough to modify those rights